General

JTA: Everything ‘alt’ is new again: Watchdogs see a mainstreaming of far-right extremism

I realize that for Jewish activists the world is always on the verge of another holocaust, but it does seem that some progress has been made, particularly on the Great Replacement idea. How else should one  interpret the Mayorkas/Biden immigration disaster? Without any new legislation (Democrats insisted that Congress had to vote for their law that would basically legalize illegal immigration), illegal immigration has dropped to practically zero.

Groups that monitor extremism say that has changed, and that the extremes have become mainstream.

They point to  White House rhetoric echoing the “great replacement theory” (an anti-immigrant conspiracy theory that puts Jews at its center), the prominence of politicians and administration appointees who have played nice with white supremacists, President Trump’s pardon of violent Jan. 6 rioters, and recent debates about whether White House advisor Elon Musk and far-right provocateur Steve Bannon flashed Nazi salutes in public.

Groups that monitor extremism see signs that the far right is no longer “alt,” but at the beating heart of American politics.

Everything ‘alt’ is new again: Watchdogs see a mainstreaming of far-right extremism

From Nazi salutes to anti-immigrant conspiracies, ideas once on the fringes are at the beating heart of the political discourse.

Remember the “alt-right”? Way back in the two-thousand-and-teens, the loose coalition of white nationalists, neo-Nazi pranksters and anti-immigrant extremists was more likely to be found in obscure corners of the internet than on mainstream conservative outlets like Fox News.

Groups that monitor extremism say that has changed, and that the extremes have become mainstream.

They point to  White House rhetoric echoing the “great replacement theory” (an anti-immigrant conspiracy theory that puts Jews at its center), the prominence of politicians and administration appointees who have played nice with white supremacists, President Trump’s pardon of violent Jan. 6 rioters, and recent debates about whether White House advisor Elon Musk and far-right provocateur Steve Bannon flashed Nazi salutes in public.

Groups that monitor extremism see signs that the far right is no longer “alt,” but at the beating heart of American politics.

“I’ve been screaming into the void about this,” agreed Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs. Before heading the JCPA, which coordinates advocacy among local Jewish community relations councils in dozens of communities, she spearheaded a successful multimillion-dollar lawsuit against the neo-Nazis who marched in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017. ”This has been my personal thesis for five, six years now.”

It’s not just Nazi salutes and anti-immigrant rhetoric. Vice President J.D. Vance and White House advisor Elon Musk alarmed activists here and in Europe with their support of Germany’s far-right AfD party, whose members have downplayed the Holocaust and promoted their own version of the great replacement theory. In his confirmation hearing, meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth signalled that he would halt a Biden-era effort to root out extremism in the military, calling it “too political.”

President Trump’s blanket pardon for all those convicted in the Jan. 6 riot at the capital was especially concerning to watchdogs, who saw it as a presidential endorsement of political violence.

“Among most of our political leaders there has been a hesitancy to name the fact that these ideas that were relegated to the fringes less than a decade ago have now moved squarely into the mainstream of our political discourse,” said Spitalnick. “And that’s true of leaders across the political spectrum who are afraid to name it — Republicans, because in many cases, it’s Republican officials who are espousing and embracing these ideas, and Democrats have, in a number of cases, been too squeamish to name it for what it is.”

One exception has been Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker. The Jewish Democrat has denounced the White House rhetoric about immigrants and warned about a constitutional crisis should Trump ignore court orders surrounding his executive actions — while noting how quickly the Nazis were able to “dismantle a constitutional republic.”

Neo-Nazis and white supremacists take part in a march the night before the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., Aug. 11, 2017. (Zach D Roberts/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

“I’m watching with a foreboding dread what is happening in our country right now,” Pritzker said at his annual combined State of the State and Budget address on Feb. 19. “The authoritarian playbook is laid bare here: They point to a group of people who don’t look like you and tell you to blame them for your problems. I just have one question: What comes next?”

For many tracking extremism on the right, the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville represented a turning point. It saw a graphic expression of the “great replacement theory,” when white supremacists carrying torches chanted “The Jews will not replace us.” The theory holds that liberals, led by Jews, are encouraging an “invasion” of people of color to western countries in order to boost the electoral chances of Democrats and other parties on the left. The shooter in the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre in 2018 seemed to have been inspired by the conspiracy theory, and targeted the congregation for its support of a pro-immigrant Shabbat.

Trump also echoed the core idea of the theory in the September 2024 presidential debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, when he said, referring to Democrats, that “these people are trying to get them to vote, and that’s why they’re allowing them into our country.”

“Invasion and replacement rhetoric is now used by people in the highest levels of our politics,” said Spitalnick. “It’s underpinning a number of the policies, including the executive orders that have been signed over the last month.”

On Feb. 18, JCPA and dozens of other civil rights and anti-extremism groups wrote a letter to Congress highlighting the use of replacement rhetoric in advancing the administration’s immigration policies. It cites two of Trump’s executive orders whose titles refer to the surge of immigration at the southern border as an “invasion.”

Groups that monitor extremism are also concerned about the message sent when Trump appoints officials who have dabbled in conspiracy theories or who appeared alongside white nationalists. Among those convicted and pardoned in the Jan. 6 riot were leaders and members of extremist groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, who have been flaunting their pardons as a victory for their ideas.

“When we think of accountability and the importance of accountability in extremism, we hope that that acts as a disincentive for more extremism and violence,” Oren Segal, senior vice president of Counter-Extremism and Intelligence at the Anti-Defamation League, said on a recent episode of the group’s “Extremely” podcast. “The question is, what message do these pardons send? And that’s one of the things we’re looking at closely: How are the extremists going to respond if they feel that perhaps they’ve been let off the hook?”

Shana Gadarian, a professor of political science at Syracuse University who studies political communication, says taboos break down when the mainstream fails to set limits.

“One of the things that we have seen over the course of the last decade or so is that norms that we saw were unbreakable were really quite fragile,” said Gadarian. “I think the fact that Donald Trump and others in the party keep opening up the doors to extremists and then not being punished electorally, not being told by other members of their party that this isn’t what we stand for, opens up this permission structure for other people to say, ‘well, maybe I don’t endorse those views, but maybe it’s okay because we need this kind of winning coalition.’”

Beirich said Trump bears much of the responsibility for inviting extreme voices into the mainstream, but that the Republican Party dropped what had been a “cordon sanitaire” — a firewall — against individuals who espoused white supremacy or neo-Nazi views. “What was really important in pushing back far-right extremism was Republicans policing their own ranks,” she said. “And that has disappeared.”

Beirich is also alarmed by the removal of content moderation on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, and on Facebook, whose Jewish owner Mark Zuckerberg said in January, “Fact checkers have been too politically biased and have destroyed more trust than they’ve created.”

“It’s like we’re returning to something that I thought we had put behind us,” said Beirich, who said that unmoderated social media was one of the main factors in the dissemination of extremist ideas and an important tool for far-right groups in organizing and raising money.

The mainstreaming of extremism has so far set off few alarm bells at many of the top Jewish organizations, at least publicly. Much of their focus of the past 16 months has been on the fallout from the Israel-Hamas war, and the harsh anti-Israel and often antisemitic rhetoric and activity it has inspired.

Jewish outrage over the extremism has also been leavened by the seemingly unconditional support for Israel for Israel among Trump, Musk and others in the president’s circle, along with Trump’s pledge to punish anti-Israel protesters on college campuses.

Extremism watchdogs who condemned Musk’s straight-arm gesture howled when the ADL concluded — without citing Musk’s voluminous online record of amplifying voices on the antisemitic far right — that Musk made an “awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute.”

Gadarian was among those disappointed in the ADL’s response to Musk’s gesture.

“If we’re going to ourselves not push back, then what is the expectation about people outside of the community to see the threats there?” she said.

(The ADL was less forgiving of Bannon after his stiff-arm salute at CPAC, calling out his “long and disturbing history of stoking antisemitism and hate, threatening violence, and empowering extremists.”)

Figures on the right, meanwhile, accuse Pritzker and other critics of Trump on the right of calling out far-right extremism and ignoring far-left antisemitism.

“At this moment, serious discussions of Trump 47 are in hilariously short supply because his critics have mostly descended into a state of near madness,” John Podhoretz wrote recently in the Jewish magazine Commentary. “They are declaring everything he does and says and thinks and believes the act of a psychotic, delusional, wild, crazy Hitler wannabe — that is, when they are not assigning these adjectives to Elon Musk rather than to Trump himself.”

In another recent Commentary piece, Noah Rothman wrote the left has glamorized “lawless” behavior like the pro-Palestinian encampments on college campuses and Black Lives Matter marches that occasionally turned violent, and in so doing “made increasingly more likely the kind of social-political violence that is despoiling American public life.”

Former President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, during the presidential debate in Philadelphia, Sept. 10, 2024, said of his opponents, “these people are trying to get them to vote, and that’s why they’re allowing them into our country.”  (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

The monitors point to statistics: A recent report by the ADL’s Center on Extremism found that “[a]ll the extremist-related murders in 2024 were committed by right-wing extremists of various kinds, with eight of the 13 killings involving white supremacists and the remaining five having connections to far-right anti-government extremists.”

The ADL noted that this three-year monopoly was only interrupted by the deadly vehicular attack in New Orleans on New Year’s Day 2025, allegedly carried out by an American citizen who pledged himself to ISIS.

Spitalnick acknowledges the spike in antisemitism on the pro-Palestinian left, but says her colleagues should be able to “walk and chew gum at the same time.”

“We need to be able to grapple with the post-Oct. 7 spike in antisemitism on campus and in progressive spaces, and not lose sight of the dire, deadly threat of right-wing extremism that directly has directly led to the mass murder of Jews and others in America, and we need the ability to do both,” she said.

Gadarian said the threat of extremism isn’t about any one group, but a worldview that threatens the safety of every group deemed “outsiders.”

“The mainstreaming of these gestures opens up the potential for the next step, which is attacks on communities, both Jewish communities and minority communities more generally,” she said. “Once it is acceptable to make a gesture of Nazi ideology, then it’s acceptable to say some people are less worthy and less deserving and shouldn’t be in politics and shouldn’t exist.”

Aaron Mate: Zelensky’s hostility to peace triggers White House meltdown

Zelensky’s hostility to peace triggers White House meltdown

Long rewarded by Washington and NATO for undermining diplomacy with Russia, Zelensky grew confrontational — and told outright falsehoods — upon hearing the opposite from Donald Trump and JD Vance.

A contentious White House meeting between President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has thrown US-Ukrainian relations into disarray. The meeting resulted in Zelensky’s ejection from the White House, the cancellation of a planned minerals agreement, and, according to one report, a review of continued US military assistance to Ukraine.

For panicked cheerleaders of the proxy war against Russia, the consensus view is that Trump has betrayed a stalwart US ally, sided with an enemy in Moscow, and may have even deliberately triggered the clash to serve his treacherous agenda.

Those who insist that Zelensky was ambushed are overlooking the cordial, lengthy exchange that occurred before the meeting turned testy. In a room full of aides and news cameras, Trump, Vance, and Zelensky held court for more than 40 minutes. It was Zelensky who became confrontational each time the two US leaders spoke favorably about negotiations with Russia.

In his opening remarks, Trump criticized his predecessor Joe Biden for refusing to “speak to Russia whatsoever” and expressed his hope to bring the war “to a close.” Zelensky responded by calling Vladimir Putin a “a killer and terrorist” and vowing that there would be “of course no compromises with the killer about our territories.” In a paranoid threat, he also declared that unless Trump helps him “stop Putin,” then the Russian leader will invade the Baltic states “to bring them back to his empire”, which would draw the US into the war, despite the “big nice ocean” shielding the US from Europe: “Your soldiers will fight.”

Trump did not interrupt or object to these initial, belligerent comments. The closest he came to a direct criticism occurred when a reporter asked about Zelensky’s avowed refusal to compromise. Trump replied that “certainly he’s going to have to make some compromises, but hopefully they won’t be as big as some people think you’re going to have to make.” Trump even promised that “we’re going to be continuing” US military support to Ukraine.

Yet because Trump also stressed that his goal is to end the war through diplomacy, Zelensky grew agitated. The tipping point came when, after 40 minutes, a reporter asked whether Trump has chosen to “align yourself too much with Putin.” Vance responded that, in his view, “the path to peace and the path to prosperity” entails “engaging in diplomacy.” It was here that Zelensky lost his composure and directly challenged Vance: “What kind of diplomacy, J.D., you are speaking about? What do you mean?”.

This drew a sharp reaction. Vance reminded Zelensky that his military is brutally nabbing Ukrainian men off the street to send them to the front lines, and that the US seeks “the kind of diplomacy that’s going to end the destruction of your country.” Zelensky then doubled down by challenging Vance to visit Ukraine and reviving his attempted fearmongering. “You have a nice ocean and don’t feel it now,” he said, referring to the Atlantic, “but you will feel it in the future.” That veiled threat angered Trump, who proceeded to call out Zelensky for, among other things, “gambling with the lives of millions of people,” and “with World War III.”

In opting to confront Vance, Zelensky showed that he is so reflexively hostile to the notion of negotiating with Russia that he is willing to berate his chief sponsor, in public no less, for daring to suggest it. And to serve his agenda, Zelensky also showed that he is willing to engage in distortion and even outright falsification.

To make his case that Putin cannot be negotiated with, Zelensky first invoked an agreement, brokered by France and Germany, that he signed with Putin in Paris on December 9, 2019. The pact called for a prisoner exchange, which, Zelensky asserted, Putin ignored. “He [Putin] didn’t exchange prisoners. We signed the exchange of prisoners, but he didn’t do it,” Zelensky said.

Zelensky was not being truthful. He himself attended a December 29, 2019 ceremony welcoming the return of Ukrainian prisoners freed under his agreement with Putin. Then in April 2020, his office hailed the release of a third round of prisoners.

December 29, 2019: Zelensky attends a welcome ceremony for Ukrainian prisoners returned under his agreement with Russia. (Yuliia Ovsiannikova/ Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Images)

That was not his only false statement. In insisting that Putin can’t be trusted to uphold agreements, Zelensky omitted his own record in undermining diplomacy with Moscow.

The December 2019 pact recommitted Ukraine and Russia to the Minsk peace process, the UN Security Council-endorsed framework for ending the war that broke out in 2014 between the post-coup Ukrainian government and Russian-backed eastern Ukrainian rebels.

After initially taking some positive steps toward implementation, Zelensky ultimately refused to comply, a stance that he previewed in Putin’s company. During a joint news conference in Paris, Zelensky visibly smirked as Putin discussed the importance of following through with Minsk. The following March, Zelensky, under pressure from Ukraine’s ultra-nationalists and US-funded NGOs, abandoned a pledge to hold direct talks with representatives of the breakaway Donbas republics, which would be granted limited autonomy under Minsk.

By that point, the Kremlin had begun to raise concerns that Zelensky was not following through. A Kremlin readout of a call between Putin and Zelensky the previous month noted that Putin had “stressed the importance of the full and unconditional fulfillment of all measures and decisions made in Minsk and adopted at the Normandy summits, including the one held in Paris on December 9, 2019… Vladimir Putin directly asked if Kyiv intends to really implement the Minsk agreements.”

Zelensky kept signaling that he had no such intention. In mid-July 2020, Zelensky’s party proposed a measure that would hold local elections throughout Ukraine – yet in a deliberate omission, the plan excluded Donbas, which was supposed to have new elections under Minsk. By that point, Zelensky was openly contemptuous of Donbas residents. “The people of the Donbas have been brainwashed,” Zelensky complained. “They live in the Russian information space… I can’t reach them.”

The entry of the Biden team to the Oval Office in January 2021 encouraged Zelensky’s confrontational path. In February 2021 – one year before Russia invaded – Zelensky shut down three television networks tied to his main political opposition, which advocated better ties with Russia. A Zelensky aide later disclosed that this crackdown was “conceived as a welcome gift to the Biden administration,” which offered its enthusiastic endorsement of Zelensky’s effort to “counter Russia’s malign influence.”

The following month, the Biden administration returned the favor by approving its first military package for Ukraine, valued at $125 million. That encouraged even more bellicosity from Zelensky’s government. Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council approved a strategy to recover all of Crimea from Russian control, including by force. Ukrainian military leaders also announced that they were “ready” to retake Donbas by force, with the help of NATO allies.

By this point, Zelensky was openly disdainful of the diplomatic path that he had signed onto in Paris. “I have no intention of talking to terrorists, and it is just impossible for me in my position,” he declared in April 2021. Zelensky also demanded changes to Minsk. “I’m now participating in the process that was designed before my time,” he said. “The Minsk process should be more flexible in this situation. It should serve the purposes of today not of the past.”

Zelensky and his aides maintained this stance in the weeks before Russia’s February 2022 invasion. “The position of Ukraine, which has been expressed many times at different levels, is unchanged,” top Zelensky advisor Andrii Yermak said. “There have not been and will not be any direct negotiations with the separatists.” Added Ukrainian security chief Oleksiy Danilov: “The fulfillment of the Minsk agreement means the country’s destruction.” Perhaps to underscore the point, Zelensky’s government escalated attacks on rebel-controlled areas.

The Russian invasion forced Zelensky to abandon his hostility to negotiations, resulting in the Istanbul talks of March-April 2022. While Zelensky now claims that Russia cannot be negotiated with, his own representatives in Istanbul hold a much different view.

“We managed to find a very real compromise,” Oleksandr Chalyi, a senior member of the Ukrainian negotiating team, recalled in December 2023. “We were very close in the middle of April, in the end of April, to finalize our war with some peaceful settlement.” Putin, he added, “tried to do everything possible to conclude [an] agreement with Ukraine.”

According to former Zelensky advisor Oleksiy Arestovich, who also took part in the talks, “the Istanbul peace initiatives were very good.” While Ukraine “made concessions,” he said, “the amount of their [Russia’s] concessions was greater. This will never happen again.” The Ukraine war, Arestovich concluded, “could have ended with the Istanbul agreements, and several hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive.”

The US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul talks by refusing to provide Ukraine with security guarantees and encouraging Zelensky to keep fighting instead. Zelensky’s decision to obey their dictates helps explain why he is so desperate to obtain a security guarantee from Trump. Having walked away from a peace deal that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, Zelensky needs a tangible Western security commitment to show for it.

In Zelensky’s defense, he has also faced, from the start of his presidency, the threat of violence from Ukrainian ultra-nationalists staunchly opposed to any peace deal with Russia and allied eastern Ukrainians. And rather than help him overcome this domestic obstacle to peace, Washington has enabled it. As the late scholar Stephen F. Cohen prophetically warned in October 2019, Zelensky would not be able to “go forward with full peace negotiations unless America has his back” against “a quasi-fascist movement” that was literally threatening his life.

For this reason, it was disrespectful of Vance to insist that Zelensky thank the US for its military support, when that assistance has in fact fueled Ukraine’s decimation. Yet Zelensky is also responsible for putting himself in this position. Because he dutifully served the US goal of using Ukraine to bleed Russia, Zelensky was rewarded with political and media adulation, along with tens of billions of dollars in NATO funding.

The unprecedented dispute at the White House shows that Zelensky’s disingenuous hostility to negotiations is no longer welcome in Washington. While this may prove fatal to Zelensky’s political career and US proxy warfare against Russia, it is a tangible step toward ending his country’s destruction.

Getting Closer to the Mainstream: Andrew Tate, ‘manosphere’ influencer now in Florida, promotes antisemitism alongside misogyny on his livestreams

JTA: Andrew Tate, ‘manosphere’ influencer now in Florida, promotes antisemitism alongside misogyny on his livestreams

Tate has praised Hamas as demonstrating “the masculine spirit of resistance.”

Advertisement

In returning to the United States this week from Romania, the far-right influencer Andrew Tate has re-imported his extreme brand of misogyny mixed with antisemitism.

Tate and his brother Tristan had been banned from leaving Romania, where they face prosecution for rape and sex trafficking, since 2022. But Romanian officials lifted the ban, in a move widely seen as reflecting the influence of the new Trump administration, and the brothers flew Thursday by private jet to Florida.

Whether they remain is an open question. Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Trump ally, has said they are not welcome in his state, and the United Kingdom is reportedly seeking to extradite the brothers, who are joint U.S.-U.K. citizens, over tax evasion charges.

But local Republican groups in Florida have welcomed Tate and the brothers’ millions of online followers have cheered their arrival in the United States.

Recently he accused the Romanian authorities of being part of “the Soros network,” and last year Mother Jones magazine reported the Tates “have increasingly pivoted to criticisms of Israel that promptly segue into antisemitic claims clearly rooted in the blood libel.”

Tate opened up vociferous anti-Israel criticism after Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack. Almost immediately, Tate announced to his followers he was raising money for Palestinians. Declaring that Israel was “genociding the Palestinians,” Tate — who in 2022 claimed to have converted to Islam — has also celebrated Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar as “defiant in the face of evil,” calling his death “heroic.” When asked last year if he would condemn Hamas, Tate responded, “No, I’m not going to condemn the masculine spirit of resistance.”

He has also recently held interviews with Candace Owens, the far-right influencer whose own journey of punditry has recently pushed her into Holocaust denial.

Last year, Tate also began flirting with Holocaust revisionism, writing on X, “If they lied to us about Gaza and Israel… Do you think they lied about ww2?” He went on, “Considering ww2 was such a large cultural event its still used to this day to psyop the populace. Bad guy = Nazi. I think you should at least understand why the war really happened.” Tate has also defended Elon Musk’s Nazi-like salute earlier this year, writing “Stop crying over the Hitler crap” and imploring his followers to “go on the offensive” and deliver it as well.

“I’m kind of thinking we should bring the Nazi salute back,” he said in a video, arguing, “If you don’t want to see the Nazi salute because it offends you so badly, just don’t call Elon a Nazi… Lean into it, double down. I am all the things you say I am.”

After Kanye West returned to X to push antisemitism and swastika merchandise earlier this month, Tate seemed to express an interest in contacting him.

And after being raided by Romanian authorities last year, Tate reposted an antisemitic message from white nationalist Nick Fuentes defending him. “Just 2 days after Andrew Tate said that ‘the Matrix’ is really just the Jewish mafia—his house was raided and he was arrested again,” the post read.

Tate’s arrest was seen as having been triggered by a different streamer, Adin Ross, who disclosed on his own stream that Tate was planning to leave Romania. Ross, who is Jewish, said in 2022 that he had declined to host Ye on his Twitch stream after the rapper told him, “You Jews aren’t going to tell me what I can and can’t say.” The next year, he hosted Fuentes. In 2024, he hosted New York Jets star Sauce Gardner when Gardner said that Jews “run the world,” and later in the year he hosted Trump as the then-candidate praised Ye as having “a good heart.”

Tate has found popularity with religious conservatives in Jewish as well as Muslim and Christian circles. Orthodox podcaster Nate Mandel had his own Jewish journey regarding Tate over the course of the past 16 months, initially arguing in favor of some of his masculinity-focused messaging in an October 2023 episode. (His co-host Shoshie Reiter, the mother of four teenaged boys, said her sons were followers of Tate.)

By this January, Mandel had revised that opinion in a new episode, proclaiming that Tate’s credible allegations and bragging about abusing women made him a “piece of s***.” (Much of this revision, Mandel said, owed to Tate’s declaration that Israel was committing “genocide.”)

The Anti-Defamation League has an extremism entry on Tate that doesn’t mention his antisemitism.

Zelensky Is Finished, Ukraine Is Finished

From Arktos
It is still too early to draw far-reaching conclusions about what happened yesterday in the Oval Office of the White House. But it is already obvious that this was an event of grand scale. We will assess its consequences a bit later, but Trump has effectively already demonstrated that the war Biden started is not only meaningless to him but, most likely, a crime.

Of course, Trump and Vance have not yet explicitly framed it this way — that the war in Ukraine, which began three years ago, was a crime of the Biden regime. But yesterday, it finally became obvious to many in the West that supporting a bloody dictator who does not know how to behave, dress, or negotiate in a situation where he clearly lacks absolute advantage is itself criminal. This strategy of the Biden administration — confronting Russia — was in fact a provocation of nuclear war.

Zelensky is still trying to argue with Trump. And he is doing it very arrogantly.

In reality, it is not so much Trump and Vance severing ties with Zelensky. And who is he, really, for the American superpower to even bother dealing with him? He is a mere nobody, a deranged little agent of the previous globalist system — a cog in the machine that functioned obediently but failed to adapt to the rapid reorientation that has occurred in the United States. What has taken place now is a true Conservative Revolution that has turned the ideology and policy of the U.S. 180 degrees. And, as a result, it has shifted the geopolitical landscape.

In this new reality, Zelensky has simply been cast aside as useless toxic waste. The entire narrative of supporting the war in an unnecessary, meaningless Ukraine (a part of Russia, restructured by globalists into an anti-Russia for reasons only they understand) has effectively collapsed. Not only has Zelensky himself come to be seen, in the eyes of Trump, Vance, and the entire American public, as a ridiculous fool trying to defy the United States — bargaining, arguing, and making demands — but also, his entire position has been rendered untenable.

Naturally, such behavior is completely unacceptable to Trump. Yes, lunatics like him exist everywhere, but they are not admitted into respectable society. Although the people who created Zelensky, hired him, armed him, and financed him were once quite satisfied with this pig — he served them, and they used him. But power has changed hands, and the lackeys have failed to grasp that there is now a new master, new rules, and new interests. They continue to serve a master who no longer exists. And, of course, for the new master, this is highly irritating. So, it is entirely justified to send such obsolete, useless lackeys — incapable of adapting to the new realities — off to the stables, or better yet, to hell.

Simply put, Zelensky is finished. Ukraine is finished. There will be no more support from Trump. Though, of course, the remaining European segment of this globalist network will still try to keep this hopeless project afloat. But I believe that soon even the Europeans will realize that continuing this already-failed adventure is more trouble than it is worth. They will quickly change course and attempt to repair our Nord Stream connections.

The first consequences of Zelensky’s conversation with Trump did not take long to materialize:

Screenshot: NBC News

Of course, we will deal with all of them gradually and carefully. First, we will achieve victory in Ukraine, since American support has practically ended, and without it, Ukraine poses no major problem for us. Once Ukraine is dealt with, we will, first of all, focus seriously on our own national revival, and second, settle accounts with those forces in the West that orchestrated all of this.

(Translated from the Russian)

The entire 10+ minute video of Zelensky, Trump, Vance Exchange

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/02/28/trump-presidency-news/

 

Constantin von Hoffmeister: Trump Crushes Zelensky

The subtitle could be: Trump as alpha male.

Trump Crushes Zelensky

America, shedding the dead skin of a broken empire, sits on its golden throne, and Trump is back in the White House, glowing, omnipotent, carnivorous. Zelensky, the tangled despot of the East, slithers in, eyes hollow, mouth a gaping wound that only money can fill. He reeks of defeat, desperation, the smell of burnt-out cities and NATO-funded body bags. The war has eaten him alive, but he still plays the game, still clings to the American teat like a starving infant.

“If you didn’t have our military equipment,” Trump says, leaning back, fingers interlocked, “if you didn’t have our military equipment, this war would have been over in two weeks.” Smirking. Amused. A cat playing with a half-dead mouse, wondering if it’s even worth the kill. The truth, hard and cold, spills onto the carpet like spilled blood: Ukraine doesn’t matter. Ukraine is a pawn. America deals in interests, not charity.

JD Vance, the golden boy of the Rust Belt, stands beside him, eyes like steel, mouth set in that grim way men have when they know they hold the bigger gun. “Peace,” he says, “is the only path forward.” Zelensky bristles — no, he snarls. Like a cornered hyena. He wants war, because without war, he is nothing. Without war, he fades into the trash heap of forgotten revolutionaries, another puppet left out in the rain.

Trump lets him squirm. He loves it. “You’re gambling with World War Three,” he says, voice thick with knowing. This isn’t a game of ideals. This isn’t good versus evil. This is a numbers game, and Ukraine’s debt is mounting. No more blank checks. No more free weapons. No more bending over for a man who thinks he can lecture the master of the deal.

Carl Schmitt grins from the grave. The sovereign is he who decides the exception. And here is Trump, drawing the line. No more eternal war, no more forced loyalties. America is sovereign, and Ukraine? Ukraine is just another problem to be solved. Friend? Foe? The difference is paper-thin, a contract waiting to be signed or shredded. Zelensky, for all his screaming about democracy and morality, doesn’t understand the game. Doesn’t understand that power is the only truth.

The decision is the event that defines the sovereign. In the clash of nations, there is no morality, only the friend and the enemy. Trump, standing as the sovereign, names the enemy not by ideology but by necessity. Zelensky is the supplicant who mistakes patronage for loyalty, who believes war can be eternal if the right pockets are lined. But the exception has been declared. America retracts its indulgence, and in that moment, Ukraine’s fate is no longer its own. Power is not in pleading but in the ability to decide, to cut, to sever. The world does not belong to those who beg. It belongs to those who dictate the terms.

The meeting doesn’t end — it implodes. No press conference. No handshakes. Just silence, the void of unspoken war. Trump wipes his hands of it. “Come back when you’re ready for peace,” he says. Dismisses him like a bad debt, like a spurned courtesan. Zelensky scurries away, the smell of failure clinging to him.

And the empire moves on.

Vance stands tall. He sees the future. He sees a nation breaking free from its endless self-inflicted wounds. He knows the war machine is a scam, a churn of dollars and dead bodies. He knows America’s strength isn’t in saving broken nations but in protecting its own.

Zelensky? He’ll run back to Europe, plead like a dethroned vassal, gnaw at whatever scraps the EU throws him. Maybe he’ll realize, in the dark corners of his sleepless nights, that the world never owed him anything. Maybe he’ll understand that gratitude and power are the only currencies that matter.

And Trump, still smiling, still towering, still in control, has made the decision. Sovereignty. Power. The exception.

The war, his war, America’s war, will end on his terms.

Or not at all.

Eurosiberia is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Why Russia expelled USAID

Glenn Greenwald interviews Alexandr Dugin: USAID as an instrument of US foreign policy, e.g., funding Ukraine media, corrupting journalists, fomenting color revolutions, etc.

5-minute video